Alcohol

Baroness Hayter of Kentish Town: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what was the total amount spent on alcohol during 2012–13 by Ministry of Justice.

Lord McNally: The Ministry of Justice records spend on Gifts and Hospitality, but not at a level of detail which would allow spend on alcohol to be isolated if this had occurred.
	The table below shows the spend on hospitality for MoJ core and agencies since 2008/2009. The total amount spent on hospitality, external lunches and dinners, and refreshments has fallen significantly since 2008/2009.
	
		
			 HMCTS   
			 Nac Level 6 FY08/09 FY09/10 FY10/11 FY11/12 FY12/13 FY13/14 Sep-13 
			 224227-Hospitality 52,997.73 -2,459.93 5,317.00 10,620.32 6,952.39 4,004.68 
			 224228-External Lunches & Dinners 247.70 9.50 -42.55 156.00 2,544.00 260.00 
			 224229-Refreshments for Interdepartmental Meetings 34,917.29 24,890.72 19,052.41 3,660.04 2,597.02 2,881.26 
			 MoJ HQ   
			 Nac Level 6 FY08/09 FY09/10 FY10/11 FY11/12 FY12/13 FY13/14 Sep-13 
			 224227-Hospitality 18,572.77 18,755.64 6,584.20 3,095.97 2,893.31 299.20 
			 224228-External Lunches & Dinners 4,262.15 3,909.39 883.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 
			 224229-Refreshments for Interdepartmental Meetings 96,946.33 28,699.71 3,096.00 247.68 0.00 0.00 
			 LAA   
			 Nac Level 6 FY08/09 FY09/10 FY10/11 FY11/12 FY12/13 FY13/14 Sep-13 
			 224227-Hospitality ALB Status 893.68 
			 224228-External Lunches & Dinners  0.00 
			 224229-Refreshments for Interdepartmental Meetings  0.00 
			 OPG   
			 Nac Level 6 FY08/09 FY09/10 FY10/11 FY11/12 FY12/13 FY13/14 Sep-13 
			 224227-Hospitality   
			 224228-External Lunches & Dinners   
			 224229-Refreshments for Interdepartmental Meetings 21,708.25 32,433.69 2,349.93 1,646.88 572.04 0.00 
			 Totals   
			 224227-Hospitality 71,570.50 16295.71 11901.2 13716.29 9845.7 5,197.56 
			 224228-External Lunches & Dinners 4,509.85 3918.89 840.72 156 2544 260.00 
			 224229-Refreshments for Interdepartmental Meetings 153,571.87 86024.12 24498.34 5554.6 3169.06 2,881.26

Anguilla

Lord Boateng: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the level of poverty in Anguilla and its eligibility for overseas development aid.
	To ask Her Majesty’s Government why they have made no allocation of overseas development aid to Anguilla.
	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what discussions they have had with the government of Anguilla about (1) the economic diversification of the island’s economy, and (2) measures to relieve poverty on the island.
	To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they plan to take action to relieve poverty in Anguilla.

Baroness Northover: Anguilla graduated from aid in 2003. The 2011 UN estimate of Anguilla’s gross national income per capita was US $18,400 (£11,500), which was 48 per cent higher than the OECD’s minimum income threshold for a high-income country classification. Such countries are normally removed from the list of countries eligible for overseas development assistance by the OECD.

Anguilla

Lord Boateng: To ask Her Majesty’s Government on how many occasions in each of the last three years United Kingdom officials have visited Anguilla; and for which Government departments those officials were working.

Baroness Warsi: UK Government officials have visited Anguilla a total number of 34 times during the past three years. This figure can be broken down by Government Department as follows:
	2011 – 6 visits (FCO – 6)
	2012 – 18 visits (FCO – 15, DFID – 2, DFT – 1)
	2013 – 10 visits (FCO – 7, DFID – 2, MOD – 1)
	Total visits – 34 (FCO – 28, DFID – 4, DFT – 1, MOD – 1)

Animals in Scientific Procedures

Lord Willis of Knaresborough: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Earl Howe on 6 November (WA 41), what steps are being taken by the Department of Health to support medical research using animals.
	To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Earl Howe on 6 November (WA 41), what steps are being taken by the Department of Health to make patients aware of the incidence of animal testing in the development of medicines for human use.

Earl Howe: The Government supports the National Council for the 3Rs (NC3Rs) — reduction, replacement and refinement of use of animals in scientific research. This body has links to the Department and other arms of Government and seeks to develop and aid in the implementation of best practice in the use of animals in scientific research.
	Within the specific area of medicines testing, there are close links between the NC3Rs and the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) and ongoing programmes seek to critically question where fewer animals may be used in medicines testing;
	for instance, there is an examination into how animals could best be used to explore reversibility of toxicity early in the development of a new medicine.
	With regard to informing patients, the issue of adding information to the label of medicinal products to the effect that the product was developed by testing on animals has been considered by the MHRA. However, this information is regulated by European legislation and there is no provision in that legislation for inclusion of such a statement: it is not feasible for the United Kingdom to act independently on this matter and insist that such information be provided in this way to patients.
	In 2010, the Government made a commitment to work to reduce the use of animals in scientific research in Coalition: our programme for Government. The Coalition commitment is not concerned with just baseline numbers, but encompasses the 3Rs more broadly, putting them at the heart of a science led approach. The Government will publish a delivery plan shortly that will set out how we are supporting and encouraging these advances and the programmes and policies through which Government will continue to deliver its commitment.

Children: Child Labour

Baroness Doocey: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what actions have been taken to eliminate the worst forms of child labour in the United Kingdom.

Lord Nash: Action taken by the UK is set out in a biennial report to the International Labour Organisation, compiled on behalf of the Government and with input from a number of Departments by the Department of Work and Pensions, the most recent of which covers the period June 2011 to May 2013. A copy of the report is being placed in the House Library.

Embryology

Lord Alton of Liverpool: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answers by Earl Howe on 8 January (WA 22–4), to what extent the record of failed treatment cycles at a licensed centre may be affected by the requirement that a cycle should be reported to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) wherever it was abandoned due to the risk of developing ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome; what, if any, assessment they have made of the impact of that requirement on the continuation of treatment with transfer of embryos to the patient’s womb and on the freezing of embryos; and what, if any, steps the HFEA proposes to take in response to such an assessment.

Earl Howe: The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) has advised that the reporting by clinics of the outcome of an in-vitro fertilisation treatment cycle only takes place once the stimulation required to collect eggs has started. It therefore follows that the reporting of such data can have no impact on the treatment cycle itself.
	The HFEA has also advised that it has made no assessment of the issue identified by the noble Lord.

Embryology

Lord Alton of Liverpool: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answers by Earl Howe on 22 January (WA 194–5) and 23 January (WA 215–6), what assessment the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority has made of the impact of the publication of data on headline success rates per cycle on competition on success rates between clinics.

Earl Howe: The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) has advised that the format used to present clinic data was agreed after a consultation exercise that took place between November 2008 and February 2009, details of which can be found on the Authority's website at:
	www.hfea.gov.uk/5240.html
	The HFEA has also advised that it has made no assessment of the issue identified by the noble Lord.

Embryology

Lord Alton of Liverpool: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the statements by the Chair of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority on 25 October that the “world of IVF is a market” and her expression of regret at not having “spoken more words of caution for those proposing to undertake IVF”.

Earl Howe: The Government has made no assessment of Professor Jardine's comments. Information for patients is provided by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority on its website at:
	www.hfea.gov.uk/fertility.html
	Details and explanations of fertility clinics' success rates are set out there.

Energy: Power Stations

Lord Stoddart of Swindon: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the removal of three transformers from Didcot power station will impair or prevent the power station from connecting to the national grid if needed to meet exceptional demand.

Baroness Verma: RWE closed its Didcot A power station in March 2013. The power station was opted-out of the Large
	Combustion Plant Directive so under the Directive is required to close. Neither the Directive, nor the national legislation through which it is transposed, makes provision for continued operation of the power station. Decommissioning of the power station is a matter for the company and the relevant authorities.

Freedom of Information Act 2000

Lord Kennedy of Southwark: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many requests under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 have been turned down by the Department for Transport since May 2010; and how many of those requests have subsequently been upheld on appeal and fulfilled.

Baroness Kramer: The Ministry of Justice publishes annual statistical reports on the handling of requests for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 for central government, broken down by Department. These reports include statistics on the outcomes of Internal Reviews and appeals to the Information Commissioner. They can be accessed on the following webpage:
	https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/government-foi-statistics.
	Information on requests made during 2013 which were initially turned down by the Department and where the information was subsequently released following an Internal Review or Appeal to the Information Commissioner will be published on the same webpage as part of the 2013 annual statistical report.
	The published statistics do not include information on cases that were appealed to the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights) and beyond. There is one instance involving an information request first received since May 2010 where the Department for Transport has released information following a decision of the First Tier Tribunal which upheld the applicant’s appeal. That request was considered under the Environmental Information Regulations 2004.

Freedom of Information Act 2000

Lord Kennedy of Southwark: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many requests under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 have been turned down by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office since May 2010; and how many of those requests have subsequently been upheld on appeal and fulfilled.

Baroness Warsi: Between 1 May 2010 and 30 June 2013, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) received 4071 Freedom of Information requests. Of those requests, we refused to release any information for 939 requests. 543 of those 939 requests were refused because the scope was too broad and the requests would have exceeded the cost limit set out in the Act.
	During this period, we received 288 requests for internal review (IR). In 70 of these cases, we partially or fully overturned our original decision and released information to the requester.
	In the same period, we also recorded 67 appeals to the Information Commissioner’s Office. The Information Commissioner upheld 10 appeals against the FCO.
	We recorded eight appeals to the First Tier Tribunal relating to requests which were first submitted after 1 May 2010. Of the eight appeals, six were by the requester and two by the FCO, however, the FCO withdrew its appeal in one case. Of the remaining seven cases, three are ongoing and the FCO was successful in the remaining four.

Government Departments: Expenditure

Lord Davies of Stamford: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether all the underspend by the Ministry of Defence in the 2011–12 financial year is being rolled over into the current financial year to be made available for spending in addition to the budget originally agreed with HM Treasury.

Lord Astor of Hever: The breakdown of the Department's underspend in Financial Year 2011-12 can be found in the Statement of Parliamentary Supply on pages 108 and 109 of the Ministry of Defence's 2011-12 Annual Report and Accounts (HC 62), laid before the House on 6 December 2012. This publication is also available online at: http:// www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/AboutDefence/CorporatePublications/AnnualReports/MOD Annual Reports1112. The breakdown of the Department's underspend in Financial Year 2012-13 can be found on p.50 of the Ministry of Defence's 2012-13 Annual Report and Accounts (HC 38), laid before the House on 16 July 2013. This publication is also available online at:
	https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/mod-annual-report-and-accounts-201213.

Government Departments: Performance Targets

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Taylor of Holbeach on 4 November (WA 11), whether members of the Government Legal Service are required to meet performance targets in legal proceedings involving government departments.

Lord Wallace of Tankerness: All Government Legal Service (GLS) lawyers are required to act in the best interests
	of the Crown and in the interests of justice. There is no requirement to meet performance targets, in the sense of cases won or lost, in legal proceedings involving government departments. All GLS lawyers do however, seek to achieve the highest professional standards at all times. Like all civil servants they are subject to performance assessment.

Government Departments: Performance Targets

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Taylor of Holbeach on 4 November (WA 11), how the 70 per cent expected success rate for presenting officers in upholding asylum decisions and 60 per cent success rate in upholding all other cases are calculated.
	To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Taylor of Holbeach on 4 November (WA 11), whether failure by a presenting officer to reach target success rates may result in disciplinary proceedings.

Lord Taylor of Holbeach: Success rates for Presenting Officers in upholding decisions on asylum and other case types are calculated using a case information database which records data that includes the outcomes of appeal hearings and the name of the officer who presented the case. This data is used on a monthly basis by managers as part of the overall assessment of performance, and provides the percentage of cases, in respect of each Presenting Officer, in which he or she was the successful party. One of the ways in which we aim to improve the efficiency of the appeals system, and our customer service, is to ensure as far as we can that only appropriate cases proceed to an appeal at court. For this reason we endeavour to review all appeal cases in advance of any appeal hearing, and therefore, the win rate targets for Presenting Officers apply to cases that have already been assessed and judged to be arguable. This is supported by an ‘Appeals Quality Assessment’ process by which managers regularly observe, assess, and provide feedback, to Presenting Officers having regard to the quality and effectiveness of their advocacy at court.
	Presenting Officers’ performance is not assessed solely by reference to their success rates at court; this is just part of a balanced performance measurement process which also includes court observation, guidance and adherence to professional standards.
	Presenting Officers’ performance is managed in accordance with the same performance management policy that applies to all Home Office staff. This requires that performance is managed, in line with civil service values and the civil service code of conduct; with a focus on continuous improvement and individual development; in a fair and transparent way; and that poor performance is managed to ensure efficient business delivery.
	Like all Home Office employees, where an officer's overall performance is judged by his or her manager to be unsatisfactory, the Home Office's poor performance procedure may be instigated. While this can lead to disciplinary proceedings including, ultimately, dismissal, the policy requires that managers identify review periods
	with the employee and make every effort to support the employee to help them improve their performance to an acceptable level during that time.

Health: Antibiotics

Baroness Manzoor: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the number and amount of antibiotics prescribed by general practitioners increased or decreased over the past ten years; and, if so, by how much.

Earl Howe: Information is not collected centrally on prescriptions issued in primary care, only those issued and dispensed. From the data set used it is not possible to separately identify prescriptions written by general practitioners (GPs) from those of other prescribers, such as nurses and pharmacists, which were subsequently dispensed.
	Comparing the change over the past 10 years, the number of prescription items for antibiotic medicines, written in the United Kingdom and dispensed in the community in England, increased by 10.5%, from 33.8 million in 2002 to 37.3 million in 2012 while the net ingredient cost (NIC) increased by 6.9%, from £157.8 million in 2002 to £168.8 million in 2012.
	
		
			 Number of prescription items for antibiotic medicines written in the United Kingdom and dispensed, in the community, in England with the net ingredient cost (NIC) 1, 2 
			 Year Items (000s) NIC (£000s) 
			 2002 33,750.6 157,814.7 
			 2003 34,332.5 162,292.2 
			 2004 33,119.0 164,253.2 
			 2005 33,825.7 154,009.2 
			 2006 33,627.5 161,397.6 
			 2007 35,429.1 163,351.1 
			 2008 34,801.3 147,414.3 
			 2009 34,182.9 133,521.5 
			 2010 35,302.0 155,790.1 
			 2011 35,333.7 154,611.8 
			 2012 37,307.0 168,768.0 
		
	
	Sources:
	Prescription Cost Analysis (PCA) system. The Health & Social Care Information Centre, Prescribing and Primary Care Services.
	Notes:
	1
	As classified within British National Formulary (BNF) paragraphs 5.1.1 Penicillins, 5.1.2 Cepha/osporins, carbapenems, and other beta-lactams, 5.1.3 Tetracyclines, 5.1.4 Aminoglycosides, 5.1.5 Macrolides, 5.1.6 Clindamycin, 5.1.7 Some other antibbacterials, 5.1.11 Metronidazole and tinidazole, 5.1.12 Quinolones.
	2
	Prescriptions include those written by GPs, nurses, pharmacists and other non-medical prescribers.

Housing: Help to Buy

Lord Bourne of Aberystwyth: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is the breakdown by region of the take-up of the Help to Buy Scheme.

Lord Deighton: The Government is committed to making the aspiration of home ownership a reality for as many households as possible. The Government wants current and future generations to experience the benefits of owning their own home, in the same way their parents were able to. Since the financial crisis, larger deposit requirements and falling equity values mean many credit-worthy households cannot get a mortgage, or are trapped in their existing homes unable to take the next step.
	On 8 October, the Government published the scheme rules for the Help to Buy: mortgage guarantee scheme, allowing lenders to sign up to the Scheme and originate mortgages that will be eligible for the Scheme when it opens in January.
	In the one month since the publication of the scheme rules on 8 October, more than 2,000 people have put in applications to lenders under the Help to Buy: mortgage guarantee scheme totalling £365m of new mortgage lending.
	Once the Help to Buy: mortgage guarantee scheme opens in January, the Government will collect data on mortgages covered by the guarantee, and will report in due course.

Housing: Help to Buy

Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is the total value of the 2,384 mortgage applications announced by the Prime Minister on 12 November as having been taken up under their Help to Buy Scheme; and what percentage of that total value is accounted for by mortgages granted in London and the south-east of England.

Lord Deighton: The Government is committed to making the aspiration of home ownership a reality for as many households as possible. The Government wants current and future generations to experience the benefits of owning their own home, in the same way their parents were able to. Since the financial crisis, larger deposit requirements and falling equity values mean many credit-worthy households cannot get a mortgage, or are trapped in their existing homes unable to take the next step.
	On 8 October, the Government published the scheme rules for the Help to Buy: mortgage guarantee scheme, allowing lenders to sign up to the Scheme and originate mortgages that will be eligible for the Scheme when it opens in January.
	In the one month since the publication of the scheme rules on 8 October, more than 2,000 people have put in applications to lenders under the Help to Buy: mortgage guarantee scheme totalling £365m of new mortgage lending.
	Once the Help to Buy: mortgage guarantee scheme opens in January, the Government will collect data on mortgages covered by the guarantee, and will report in due course.

Immigration

Lord Roberts of Llandudno: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they have any further plans to roll out the pilot projects for (1) the “Go Home” advertisement vans piloted in London, and (2) the “Is life here hard? Going home is simple” advertisements piloted in UKBA public enquiry offices in Glasgow and Hounslow; and when the evaluations of those projects will be made public.

Lord Taylor of Holbeach: The Home Office will not be rolling out the ad vans further. The evaluation for Operation Vaken, of which the ad vans were one element, was published on 31 October 2013 and copies were placed in the library of both Houses. The separate pilot activity in reporting centres in Hounslow and Glasgow will not be repeated in its current form.

Magna Carta

Lord Bourne of Aberystwyth: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans they have to collaborate with other countries in the celebration of the 800th anniversary of the sealing of Magna Carta.

Baroness Warsi: The Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) is delighted to have been invited to work with the Magna Carta 800th Committee of the Magna Carta Trust, to help support and promote the anniversary around the world.
	In November 2012, the FCO asked the UK Cultural Diplomacy Group, which is convened by the British Council, to consider how to mark the 800th anniversary, offering its overseas network as a resource and asset to all. The British Council, in partnership with the BBC are already working on Magna Carta 800 events through its Teaching English activities, details can be found at: www.teachingenglish.org.uk/magna-carta. The activities cover a variety of topics from history to human rights, and the foundations of modern democracy.
	The FCO, the British Library, the British Council and the BBC have agreed to work closely together to coordinate our efforts to promote the Magna Carta 800th anniversary in conjunction with the Magna Carta 800 organising Committee.

Mesothelioma: Compensation

Lord Alton of Liverpool: To ask Her Majesty’s Government why, as part of their review under section 48 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012,
	they cite the Mesothelioma Bill as a reason for bringing into force sections 44 and 46 of that Act in respect of mesothelioma claims.

Lord McNally: When this House agreed to the provision that became section 48 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders (LASPO) Act 2012, I gave undertakings about the application of the ‘no win no fee’ conditional fee agreement (CFA) reforms to mesothelioma cases. I confirmed that that would only happen after an appropriate review, with published results, and that we would work in a ‘synchronised way’ with the Department for Work and Pensions in its work on helping victims of mesothelioma who are unable to trace their employers’ insurer (Official Report, 25 April 2012, col 1824). The Government accepts that more needs to be done to help victims of mesothelioma, who are unable to trace their employer’s insurer, which is why the Mesothelioma Bill was introduced in May 2013.
	The review was carried out as part of the Government consultation which closed on 2 October 2013. We are carefully considering the responses in respect of mesothelioma claims and will announce the outcome of that review by the end of the year.

NHS: Accident and Emergency Services

Baroness Finlay of Llandaff: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the comments by the College of Emergency Medicine about overcrowding in accident and emergency departments; and what steps they are taking to ensure that any delays in transferring patients from accident and emergency units to other services do not exacerbate any overcrowding.
	To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to Sir Bruce Keogh’s report Transforming urgent and emergency care services in England, how they will monitor patient safety in relation to journey times under the proposed new structure; and how they will inform the public about which service they should access.
	To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to Sir Bruce Keogh’s report Transforming urgent and emergency care services in England, what steps they will take to ensure that the working environment under the proposed new structure encourages recruitment, retention and career progression for emergency medicine doctors and consultants.
	To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to Sir Bruce Keogh’s report Transforming urgent and emergency care services in England, how they will ensure that there is sufficient primary care capacity to avert people accessing accident and emergency units as a default.
	To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to Sir Bruce Keogh’s report Transforming urgent and emergency care services in England, on what evidence
	the proposal for greater use of ambulances for mobile urgent treatment is based, in particular in respect of the relative safety of the proposal compared to the current system.

Earl Howe: We recognise the important points raised by the College of Emergency Medicine on the pressures faced by accident and emergency (A&E) and the risk of overcrowding. There are enormous pressures on our A&E services which have grown in recent years, including a 50% increase in attendances since 2002-03, from 14 million to 21 million and 1 million more in the last three years.
	400,000 people attend A&E every week, resulting in 70,000 emergency admissions, equivalent to a 32% increase over the last decade.
	In particular there has been an increase in attendance by frail elderly patients with complex needs who are difficult to treat quickly and difficult to discharge. Patients aged 80 and over represent 8.3% of attendances, but only 4.9% of the population.
	Recognising these growing pressures on the system, Sir Bruce Keogh undertook his recent review of urgent and emergency care, published on the 13 November. The report set out an overarching vision of how urgent & emergency care services will be transformed.
	However, final plans have not yet been developed. Detailed plans will be developed by NHS England in Phase two by teams of expert clinicians and patients. Phase two, which is already underway, involves NHS England working closely with stakeholders and partners from across the system. A delivery group has already been established, with representatives from more than 20 different clinical, managerial and patients' associations. Details of how specific areas of work will be taken forward will be provided by NHS England in due course.
	The first report is based on an engagement exercise which took place between June and August of this year, with over 1000 people contributing, including members of the public, National Health Service staff, commissioners of services and other key stakeholders including the College of Emergency Medicine.
	To ensure a managed transition to the future system, NHS England anticipate that it will take 3-5 years to implement the major transformational change set out within its report.

Palestine

Baroness Tonge: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many files relating to Palestine between 1900 and 1950 remain in the possession of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and have not been deposited in the National Archives.

Baroness Warsi: The Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) holds a range of material
	relating to Palestine over the 1900 to 1950 period. This includes birth, death and marriage registers, material on the Palestine Police and Palestine Railways, legal records, Colonial Office records and file registers. The FCO has published a detailed inventory of its archive records on the gov.uk Website (www.gov.uk/archive-records) which includes estimated file counts based on the amount of shelf space occupied by the record series. Material relating to Palestine is spread over a number of record series as well as files which don’t exclusively cover Palestine. It would involve disproportionate cost to accurately count all relevant files. Our approximate estimate is that the FCO archive holds at least 100 files or bound volumes containing content relevant to Palestine for the period in question. The FCO is currently developing a detailed plan for the review and release of all legacy material held in the FCO archive.

Pensions

Lord Laird: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Wallace of Saltaire on 8 November (WA 27), why the forfeiture of an individual pension for a criminal conviction of a civil servant related to their employment or work is a confidential matter in cases where the details of the conviction have been publicised; what assessment they have made of the deterrent value of such a decision being made known; and whether all such convictions are being brought to the attention of the Cabinet Office under the advisory guidance to employing departments on consideration of forfeiture or other pension penalties.

Lord Wallace of Saltaire: The issue of forfeiture is a separate issue from the conviction for an offence. Information about pension entitlement is confidential personal information. The small number of forfeiture cases each year means that disclosure would make it possible to identify individual Civil Service pension scheme members who have forfeited, in whole or in part, their pensions following their conviction of an offence in connection with their employment that brought the Civil Service into disrepute. As there are Statutory obligations not to disclose personal information there has been no formal assessment of the deterrent value. It is for individual Civil Service employers to decide whether an offence is of sufficient gravity that they are obliged to refer a case to the Cabinet Office in accordance with the published guidance.

Prisons: Sexual Abuse

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon on 30 October (WA 267–8), whether and if so how they are able to evaluate the nature and extent of
	sexual abuse by staff in HM Prisons in England and Wales and determine the implications for prison policy.

Lord McNally: As the Noble Lord, Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon, said in his Written Answer on 30 October (WA 267-8), the National Offender Management Service holds high level information centrally on staff who have been subject to disciplinary procedures. However, it is not possible to extract detailed information for disciplinary action taken as a result of allegations that are specific to sexual abuse as this would incur disproportionate cost.

Prudential Regulation Authority

Baroness Noakes: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Deighton on 29 July (WA 259), when the Director of the Prudential Regulation Authority will answer the question; and when that answer will be placed in the Library of the House.

Lord Deighton: The PRA have sent a letter in response and a copy of the response has been placed in the Library of the House.

Railways: Channel Tunnel

Lord Berkeley: To ask Her Majesty’s Government which organisation is responsible for the safety regulation of the Channel Tunnel shuttle trains; and which regulations apply.

Baroness Kramer: The Channel Tunnel Intergovernmental Commission (IGC) is the safety authority for the Channel Tunnel. The Channel Tunnel Safety Authority advises and assists the IGC on all matters concerning safety in the construction and operation of the Tunnel.
	The relevant regulations for the safety of shuttle trains are the bi-national regulation of the IGC of 24 January 2007, as amended on 6th February 2013; and national UK and French health and safety laws as relevant within each county’s territory within the concession.

Roads: A14

Lord Adonis: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will place in the Library of the House copies of the representations they have received in relation to their proposal to introduce tolls as part of the upgrade of the A14.

Baroness Kramer: The Highways Agency is currently in the process of preparing a consultation report, reviewing over 1500 responses received during the recent consultation. The consultation report will be published on the Highways Agency website in due course.

Russia

Lord Rea: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their current assessment of the risk of ill-treatment from the Russian authorities facing those associated with Akhmed Zakaev and other members of the Chechen political leadership in exile.

Lord Wallace of Saltaire: The Government does not comment on individual cases, or speculate on the security of individuals.

Swaziland

Lord Jones of Cheltenham: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their assessment of the state of human rights in Swaziland.

Baroness Warsi: As the Foreign and Commonwealth Office's most recent annual Human Rights Report set out, Swaziland continues to suffer from a range of governance problems which adversely impact human rights and inhibit the country’s social and economic development. Restrictions on political parties, the rights of trade unions, freedom of association, independence of the judiciary, and equality of women are areas where greater progress needs to be made.

Taxation: Charities

Lord Vinson: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what has been the cost to the Exchequer of the tax deductibility of charitable gifts and tax-exempt income for all United Kingdom charities in the last year of record.

Lord Deighton: HMRC publishes figures for cost to the Exchequer of charitable tax reliefs in National Statistics Table 10.2:
	http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/statistics/charity/table10-2.pdf

Venezuela

Lord Ashcroft: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their assessment of the 1 November statement by the International Democrat Union on recent political developments in Venezuela.

Baroness Warsi: We have noted the International Democrat Union (IDU) statement on Venezuela. We have been following the situation in Venezuela closely, including recent political, social and economic developments, some of which are referred to in the IDU statement. We encourage all parties in Venezuela to work together to reduce tensions and promote reconciliation for the benefit of all Venezuelans, both before and after the municipal elections on 8 December. The British Government continues to work with the Government and people of Venezuela to strengthen our relationship and deepen co-operation in areas of mutual interest.

Women and Girls: Protection in Emergencies

Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what commitments and outcomes they expect from the high-level meeting on protecting girls and women in emergencies on 13 November.

Baroness Northover: The High Level Event Keep Her Safe: Protecting Girls and Women in Emergencies on 13 November was attended by senior government, UN, NGO and civil society representatives and its purpose was to agree a fundamental new approach to protecting girls and women in emergency situations, both man-made and natural disasters.
	The High Level Event endorsed a communique underlining the importance of such early action to protect girls and women in emergencies. Participants agreed to act, or fund action, to prevent and respond to violence against women and girls from the first phase of an emergency, without waiting for evidence
	of specific instances of violence to emerge. They further recognised the need for comprehensive sexual and reproductive health, psychosocial and mental health services for women and girls affected by crises. Participants also made commitments specific to their own agencies. These included pledges to increase levels of expertise, and to share best practice and conduct gender disaggregated reporting in humanitarian situations.
	The UK announced £21.6 million in new funding to help protect girls and women in emergencies. Other funding commitments totalling £19.7 million were also made by the United States, Switzerland, Japan and EU Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection (ECHO).

Women and Girls: Protection in Emergencies

Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking to ensure that social norms at a community level form a key part in the outcomes of the high-level meeting on protecting girls and women in emergencies on 13 November.

Baroness Northover: The High Level Event on Protecting Girls and Women in Emergencies was attended by senior government, UN, NGO and civil society representatives and its purpose was to agree a fundamental new approach to protecting girls and women in emergency situations, both man-made and natural disasters.
	The High Level Event endorsed a communique underlining the importance of such early action to protect girls and women in emergencies. Participants agreed to act, or fund action, to prevent and respond to violence against women and girls from the first phase of an emergency, without waiting for evidence of specific instances of violence to emerge. They further recognised the need for comprehensive sexual and reproductive health, psychosocial and mental health services for women and girls affected by crises.
	Participants also made commitments specific to their own agencies. These included pledges to increase levels of expertise, and to ensure all staff understand the risks of violence faced by women and girls in humanitarian contexts. This will help to improve humanitarian actors’ ability to understand and respond appropriately to the local context.
	The Secretary of State also announced a commitment of £9 million to the International Rescue Committee for its work with adolescent girls in Pakistan, Democratic Republic of Congo and Ethiopia. This programmes aims to build a body of evidence and practice on protecting girls from violence, informed by a solid understanding of local practices and attitudes.